[asterisk-dev] Time to rename chan_gulp?

[Paul Belanger]

On 13-05-03 01:05 PM, Hans Witvliet wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
>
>> * sipng
>> * sip2
> <history>chan_sip2 and chan_sip3 were failed projects that I operated years ago. Chan_sip2 was mostly integrated,
> but not all. Chan_sip3 was never fully funded to complete, but the web site is still up (codename-pineapple) and there's a lot
> of code in there. </history>
>
> /O ;-)
>
>> * sipnew
>> * pjsip
>> * sippy (or sipy)
>> * sipast
>> * astsip
>> * gulp
>>
>> I'm fine with whatever we call this. How about a vote being taken on the
>> channel driver name and we go with whatever the majority of people
>> decide is best?
>>
>
> So, if sip2 and sip3 are not appropriate, advance to chan_sip4
>
> After all general public jumped from ipv4 to ipv6 ....
>
Why not just call it chan_sip-new?  Seriously, adding a 1,2, or 9999 
after something is just wrong.

Name the module as chan_gulp, but the dial tech as SIP. I don't believe 
it is possible to run both chan_sip and chan_gulp at the same time is it?


This way, you will still be able to use Dial(SIP/foo).

-- 
Paul Belanger | PolyBeacon, Inc.
Jabber: paul.belanger at polybeacon.com | IRC: pabelanger (Freenode)
Github: https://github.com/pabelanger | Twitter: 
https://twitter.com/pabelanger